Jump to content

The end of prosecutions for drug use and possession?


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Oh these poor mislead people,it was a means of escaping from the struggles of everyday life. Yeah right. Agree with you "fish" what you do at home is your business, but why should you and I pay for th

Latest report / police say 70 have died so far with one type of drug. If those were / was a mass shooting numbers or school suicides would they say it was a health issue and not terrorist, hate attack

Fish. How much do you think it costs for the help via the health system. A visit to the psychiatric ward and counselling is far more expensive than putting them in prison. The psychiatric employers ar

Posted Images

Ask yourself, is possession of a drug a justice issue or a health issue?

 

I don't care what you do in the privacy of your home, as long as it doesn't affect me.

 

If you want to smoke, snort or otherwise ingest what ever you want, go for it. But if you go bat-sh*t crazy, your teeth fall out, or you get liver failure, you might need some healthcare....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ask yourself, is possession of a drug a justice issue or a health issue?

 

I don't care what you do in the privacy of your home, as long as it doesn't affect me.

 

If you want to smoke, snort or otherwise ingest what ever you want, go for it. But if you go bat-sh*t crazy, your teeth fall out, or you get liver failure, you might need some healthcare....

Oh these poor mislead people,it was a means of escaping from the struggles of everyday life. Yeah right. Agree with you "fish" what you do at home is your business, but why should you and I pay for their habit/mistake?? maybe help out once or twice but 3rd tough,probably easy to say that as my family are not affected by drugs or alcohol but what if it was yours/mine brother son wife??

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh these poor mislead people,it was a means of escaping from the struggles of everyday life. Yeah right. Agree with you "fish" what you do at home is your business, but why should you and I pay for their habit/mistake?? maybe help out once or twice but 3rd tough,probably easy to say that as my family are not affected by drugs or alcohol but what if it was yours/mine brother son wife??

 

Latest report / police say 70 have died so far with one type of drug. If those were / was a mass shooting numbers or school suicides would they say it was a health issue and not terrorist, hate attacks or resulting  from bulling and no intervention was needed. Agree HT when they hit rock bottom and need medical assistance, which usually requires hospitalization the tax payer should not have to pay. Would the insurance companies deem it a sickness a pay within in the terms of a sickness insurance policy. Like hell they would.

 

"Oh these poor mislead people, it was a means of escaping from the struggles of everyday life." Can see employers providing facilities for staff every time they hit a to hard solving daily work situation or feel over worked so that puff puff or snort can occur during work hours. Yeah. Go the whole hog and allow the young doctors too to snort, puff puff up also before a long operation is to be undertaken or when they are tired or to avoid burn out for hospital staff members. :razz:  :thumbup: 

 

Within time it could solve the housing crisis also. :wave:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh these poor mislead people,it was a means of escaping from the struggles of everyday life. Yeah right. Agree with you "fish" what you do at home is your business, but why should you and I pay for their habit/mistake?? maybe help out once or twice but 3rd tough,probably easy to say that as my family are not affected by drugs or alcohol but what if it was yours/mine brother son wife??

Excellent example HT, if your brother / son / wife is addicted to drugs, would you want them prosecuted, acquire a criminal record, spend time in prison where they can solidify their drug dependency and learn how to be an effective criminal?

 

or would you want to help them?

Rehabilitiation? Mental health support (a lot of drug issues start with fairly manageable mental health issues)

Detox centres, counselling, meaningful help with their life situation that is leading to a dependency on drugs.

 

This lay change is being driven by the issues with synthetics. A high proportion of users are homeless. The harm caused to the users is significant, including death. Prosecuting them isn't going to help in any way. Its not going to reduce the harm. Putting them in prison would help in the context of a dry bed and three square meals a day.

You threaten a user with a 3 strikes thing, what do you think will happen? Will they be able to use their conscious mind to somehow overcome the chemical addition in their brain (the chemical addition they haven't been able to control since getting started?)

 

Or will they just say - 'f*ck it' - and take the biggest hit they can - which will likely result in brain injury or death?

 

As pointed out above, Duterte's war on drugs hasn't reduced drug use. Under fear of bearing shot, people still do drugs. Better to help them than to shoot them (or prosecute them, in the NZ context).

 

Dealers and organised crime / importers, that is different. But users? just help them...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent example HT, if your brother / son / wife is addicted to drugs, would you want them prosecuted, acquire a criminal record, spend time in prison where they can solidify their drug dependency and learn how to be an effective criminal?

 

or would you want to help them?

Rehabilitiation? Mental health support (a lot of drug issues start with fairly manageable mental health issues)

Detox centres, counselling, meaningful help with their life situation that is leading to a dependency on drugs.

 

This lay change is being driven by the issues with synthetics. A high proportion of users are homeless. The harm caused to the users is significant, including death. Prosecuting them isn't going to help in any way. Its not going to reduce the harm. Putting them in prison would help in the context of a dry bed and three square meals a day.

You threaten a user with a 3 strikes thing, what do you think will happen? Will they be able to use their conscious mind to somehow overcome the chemical addition in their brain (the chemical addition they haven't been able to control since getting started?)

 

Or will they just say - 'f*ck it' - and take the biggest hit they can - which will likely result in brain injury or death?

 

As pointed out above, Duterte's war on drugs hasn't reduced drug use. Under fear of bearing shot, people still do drugs. Better to help them than to shoot them (or prosecute them, in the NZ context).

 

Dealers and organised crime / importers, that is different. But users? just help them...

Disagree. You say what they do in their own home is OK but when it causes unnecessary / avoidable costs / burden on the tax payer it's not o'k. 

 

"Excellent example HT, if your brother / son / wife is addicted to drugs, would you want them prosecuted, acquire a criminal record, spend time in prison where they can solidify their drug dependency and learn how to be an effective criminal?

or would you want to help them?"

 

Help them by all means but not by the tax payers, when schools, school teachers, young doctors, aged care workers are being ignored and underfunded, more police are required, super annuitant's, retirees are being underfunded they come first. They the uses if needing help as you say have partners, brothers, sisters, uncles, Aunties, friends, parents, they are the ones that should pay not the tax payer.  There is lots of other avenues to treat depression without resorting to illegal drugs. I always thought a drug use or drug dependency started as a result of boredom, for a fast adrenalin rush, or just to be out of it, rather than experience a beautiful unpolluted environment experience, be in a tranquil setting, to seek peace of mind without illegal drugs, see a sunset or sunrise on the horizon and to have a higher high than a alcohol anti dope or to experience a weird sensation as occupying ones free time without exerting to much physical energy. A lazy persons way to entraining their free time knowingly there is a high probability to mental depression, loss of problem solving skills, and on a down hill trip to squalor, unemployment and addiction, destruction off ones personnel health that would require family intervention, social help and family financing and support. Perhaps a better solution would be for insurance companies to provide a insurance cover / policy. Parents, friends  could take insurance, pay the premiums in the event one or more of their children, friends  fall victim's. Premiums would be adjusted accordingly to claims experience and by the insurance companies actuary.  Posters are claiming big bother and the authorities are going over board with revenue gathering taxes, fees. Is it any wonder when the catch cry to every social issue is also going overboard calling avoidable issues / happenings  a qualifying public health payable issue or a caring  community issue to be funded by the Government or local governments.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Disagree. You say what they do in their own home is OK but when it causes unnecessary / avoidable costs / burden on the tax payer it's not o'k. 

 

Absolutely agree with you there Rehab,

but how much do you think it costs to keep someone in Prison?

and how much does it cost the govt to bring a prosecution?

 

It is far cheaper for the tax payer to not prosecute drug users. I absolutely agree with you on that.

 

After that point, then what do we do? we can help them, or ignore them. I've no problem if you want to ignore them. That is better than prosecuting them. and a lot cheaper.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutely agree with you there Rehab,

but how much do you think it costs to keep someone in Prison?

and how much does it cost the govt to bring a prosecution?

 

It is far cheaper for the tax payer to not prosecute drug users. I absolutely agree with you on that.

 

After that point, then what do we do? we can help them, or ignore them. I've no problem if you want to ignore them. That is better than prosecuting them. and a lot cheaper.

 

You replied to quick FISH before I could edit and add on to my post. The solution I realised and was editing the post when you posted  and challenged such as your question above. Would your argue your argument the same avenue / way  for persons that have burglary equipment, car breaking in- stealing equipment in their possession with the intent to commit burglaries or steal automobile's. It cost just the same to prosecute them and to put them in jail. The same insurance policy cover could be available to parents, family and friends to take up for such problem persons and to pay the premiums, not the state.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...